Support NeoGAF

[M1chl]

Apple is the GOAT. The ones who know, know. The rest can go wank to their Lenovo

Team Apple baby.

we can tell, no need to say it

 

[Edgelord79]

This pleases me greatly.

 

[SportsFan581]

I see. Where’s Fortnite on iOS? Why’s there no native XCloud and Nvidia GeforceNow app?

Are you saying there has been a large scale migration from iOS to Android as the result of the above? Or any sign of consumers showing distress from the above?

I don't think there has been yet, but if enough vendors pulled support there would be an outcry and Apple would change policies as needed on their own. The fact that hasn't happened with the apps mentioned points to these apps not being as important to consumers as the software vendors think they are.

What ‘losses’? Apple already has a very healthy profit margin on hardware alone, and the AppStore will remain wildly popular, even with changes.

The fact you envisage losses means your initial premise (that changes aren’t something Apple customers care about) is wrong, doesn’t it?

Not in the slightest no. Part of this is Apple loosing their ability to take a percentage of subscription revenue from signups on things like Netflix and Spotify on their own store. No usage changes on the part of the consumer would be needed. The consumers likely don't want to make changes but the software vendors do, which will force some shift in consumer habbits.

And it doesn't matter if Apple is at 99% profit. They will fight to maintain that 99%, every single penny lost will ultimately be paid for by the consumer, of course. Maybe nothing changes and the status quo is maintained and Apple loses nothing, or they do lose something and Apple passes that on to the consumers.

 

[FF:Enhanced_Reality]

It takes less than thirty seconds of searching to find a veritable cornucopia of corruption, dishonesty, aggression, and general anti competitive behavior from Apple that goes back more than thirty years. They are a personification of everything wrong in the tech space; if you don't see this, you're actively trying to avoid the knowledge.

See, I get around this by not buying Apple products. Pretty sneaky, I know.

 

[Ozriel]

Are you saying there has been a large scale migration from iOS to Android as the result of the above? Or any sign of consumers showing distress from the above?

I don't think there has been yet, but if enough vendors pulled support there would be an outcry and Apple would change policies as needed on their own. The fact that hasn't happened with the apps mentioned points to these apps not being as important to consumers as the software vendors think they are.

The apps can be important to consumers without being the determining factor behind phone purchase choices. I can assure you that I absolutely don't like being unable to purchase books on the Kindle app on my iPhone.
As a consumer, Apple being forced to be more open will benefit me.

Not in the slightest no. Part of this is Apple loosing their ability to take a percentage of subscription revenue from signups on things like Netflix and Spotify on their own store. No usage changes on the part of the consumer would be needed. The consumers likely don't want to make changes but the software vendors do, which will force some shift in consumer habbits.

And it doesn't matter if Apple is at 99% profit. They will fight to maintain that 99%, every single penny lost will ultimately be paid for by the consumer, of course. Maybe nothing changes and the status quo is maintained and Apple loses nothing, or they do lose something and Apple passes that on to the consumers.

Why is that your chief concern as a consumer, and not as a member of the Apple leadership team? They're still going to be raking in tens of billions in profits. Your Netflix example doesn't even work since Netflix has now disabled the option of paying in app.
There's a limit to what extent they can jack prices up...the market will only bear so much in pricing, especially in China where there marketshare is beginning to slip.

 

[SportsFan581]

Why is that your chief concern as a consumer, and not as a member of the Apple leadership team? They're still going to be raking in tens of billions in profits. Your Netflix example doesn't even work since Netflix has now disabled the option of paying in app.
There's a limit to what extent they can jack prices up...the market will only bear so much in pricing, especially in China where there marketshare is beginning to slip.

There is NO consumer need or benefit addressed by any of this. ZERO. This can essentially only leave consumers in the same position or hurt them. There is no little guy in this. This is a fight between a multi-trillion dollar corporation and for the most part multi-billion dollar publishers fighting for their own ends. Consumers have showed zero concern about any of this, and why should they.

Do I personally take issue with this new position of the US government regarding them being the determining factor in how successful your business can be and who wins and loses, absolutely. By all means monitor real monopolistic behavior and attack that within the power of the laws available. But I'm not seeing anything that they've put forward showing Apple doing anything more than building an extremely popular family of devices that everyone wants. They seem to be charging what has always been industry standard rates (in terms of the store). I haven't seen any evidence of them taking any actions to limit the development of rivals whether that be in access to developers or software, to technology, or to retail space in stores and carriers. Maybe there is proof of that, but nothing that I've seen.

Maybe there is a case for forcing Apple into a rigid rate structure for the store, because it does seem like they've been handing out sweetheart deals in select instances, but that's about all I see from them.

If there is a great outcry from consumers demanding an opensource fully open handheld OS, someone should get on that. Plenty of places to start and handset makers out there. Unless, of course, it is known that the consumer outcry is nonexistent and that the new product would fail.

 

[ResetEraVetVIP]

When your product leads to the isolation, exclusion and stigmatism of people, and you use your msrket position to quash choice.

That’s what a business is…all businesses squash choice..

 

[PaintTinJr]

This is me being being hyper technical, no offense intended: macOS, iOS (and subsequently iPad OS) are based on FreeBSD. Also free and open source (though considered a "full os" and not just a kernel like Linux), but far more "permissive" licensing: Any person or company can take the source code, build on it, and are under no obligation to release their own source code. Sony and Nintendo use FreeBSD as well.

Linux is GPL which is a lot more restrictive, but worth it for companies where the o/s is a means to an end, not always a totally vertically integrated product: Google with Android, Valve with Steam O/S (still Debian, I believe) and the Steam Deck interface (Arch Linux), Canonical with Ubuntu (money is made on support contracts). Google and Valve in particular invite other companies to jump in with their own hardware; the more users, the more money made on apps or games.

I don't think a Linux based console would be released by a megacorp. Closest I can remember was the crowd funded "Indrema" which never made it to market.

Yeah, the gist of my point wasn't hyper technical and was more to refute that Apple's OS flavours are unique to support them having a right to control consumers, and me merely highlighting they are derived favours of an entire industry's efforts, whether that be in real products or RFCs or patents.

The crux of the matter wasn't even if their OS flavours are unique, but that they are primarily used as general purpose computing OSes, because they are filled with general purpose computing software technologies, and yet somehow still lack the most basic freedom necessary of all OSes in the economically open market that they operate and dominate.

 

[PaintTinJr]

LOL what’s your point? What makes iPhone a monopoly? I’ll wait..

Where did I actually state they had a monopoly? or even use that word you've used for a strawman?

However....and I am happy to use a similar word this time in this phrase: "monopolistic practices".

You don't need to hold an absolute monopoly to exert monopolistic pressure on suppliers and consumers when in a dominant position with suppliers and consumers, as Apple does with its ecosystem.

 

[Tams]

That’s what a business is…all businesses squash choice..

Hence why the government(s) are stepping in.

Apple have gone too far.

 

[ResetEraVetVIP]

Where did I actually state they had a monopoly? or even use that word you've used for a strawman?

However....and I am happy to use a similar word this time in this phrase: "monopolistic practices".

You don't need to hold an absolute monopoly to exert monopolistic pressure on suppliers and consumers when in a dominant position with suppliers and consumers, as Apple does with its ecosystem.

So I guess PS5 is a monopoly because they have an ecosystem or Lamborghini because only some people can buy them.“M0nopOly!!11!”

 

[ResetEraVetVIP]

Hence why the government(s) are stepping in.

Apple have gone too far.

That’s NOT why the government is stepping in because the government itself is a monopoly lol. The government doesn’t care about consumer satisfaction, they are pushing an agenda. The government is the biggest monopoly out there lmao, you have to pay for electricity, water, gas, food and health care, most of that stuff can be free, but the government makes you pay. Our tax money is going god knows where and the COVID vaccine was free yet life saving medicine is super expensive. The government shouldn’t be talking about monopolies…

 

[Tams]

That’s NOT why the government is stepping in because the government itself is a monopoly lol. The government doesn’t care about consumer satisfaction, they are pushing an agenda. The government is the biggest monopoly out there lmao, you have to pay for electricity, water, gas, food and health care, most of that stuff can be free, but the government makes you pay. Our tax money is going god knows where and the COVID vaccine was free yet life saving medicine is super expensive. The government shouldn’t be talking about monopolies…

You're not going to have that discussion with me on here.

And you won't elsewhere as I don't anymore go to any online communities that allow or are into such discussions.

 

[ResetEraVetVIP]

You're not going to have that discussion with me on here.

And you won't elsewhere as I don't anymore go to any online communities that allow or are into such discussions.

I'm correct, but I won’t go off topic, so I won’t talk about it anymore..

 

[Tams]

I'm correct, but I won’t go off topic, so I won’t talk about it anymore..

It's not off-topic, but it is now forbidden here, so let's leave it at that.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

That’s NOT why the government is stepping in because the government itself is a monopoly lol. The government doesn’t care about consumer satisfaction, they are pushing an agenda. The government is the biggest monopoly out there lmao, you have to pay for electricity, water, gas, food and health care, most of that stuff can be free, but the government makes you pay. Our tax money is going god knows where and the COVID vaccine was free yet life saving medicine is super expensive. The government shouldn’t be talking about monopolies…

Pending the country and laws, it's hard or impossible to even sue the government if they did something shady. A person or company can get tied up in a lawsuit no problem, but trying to take the gov to court is tough.

So just like governments spouting anti-monopoly rhetoric despite being a monopoly themselves for many things, they often have immunity laws and complicated processes in place to protect their own asses from being sued to high heaven despite creating the laws.

 

[ResetEraVetVIP]

It's not off-topic, but it is now forbidden here, so let's leave it at that.

Okay.

 

[Mooreberg]

Yeah, the gist of my point wasn't hyper technical and was more to refute that Apple's OS flavours are unique to support them having a right to control consumers, and me merely highlighting they are derived favours of an entire industry's efforts, whether that be in real products or RFCs or patents.

The crux of the matter wasn't even if their OS flavours are unique, but that they are primarily used as general purpose computing OSes, because they are filled with general purpose computing software technologies, and yet somehow still lack the most basic freedom necessary of all OSes in the economically open market that they operate and dominate.

Got ya. Very good points.

 

[JackMcGunns]

I think it’s pretty simple. Android. Messaging has always been horrible in that platform. Standard texting app made people gravitate towards digital messaging apps. Whatsapp happens to be the one that is attached to your number while not being nickeled and dimed to the former per text charges.

This doesn’t make any sense, what do you use to sent other android users your videos? definitely not your default SMS app. Would it be nice for Apple to release iMessage on Android? Maybe? still wouldn’t be the default app. You would still need to download it.

What are you talking about?
RCS > SMS

 

[Ozriel]

EU launches probe into Meta, Apple and Alphabet under sweeping new tech law

The EU's probes into Apple, Alphabet and Meta are under the Digital Markets Act and focuses on the practices carried out by these tech giants on their services.

www.cnbc.com

In related news.

 

[PaintTinJr]

So I guess PS5 is a monopoly because they have an ecosystem or Lamborghini because only some people can buy them.“M0nopOly!!11!”

This is a low effort response to a key distinction I was making between things, but ....yes even PlayStation and Nintendo have been accused and fined for monopolistic practices in certain countries for price fixing. So even with your wilful ignorance to accept that granny's won't be using a PlayStation 5 browser to pay utility bills, food shop or book a holiday somewhere hot to give a sample example of routine tasks consumers might carry out on a general purpose computer like a iPhone or iPad, the fact remains that any company operating with monopolistic practices will face corrective measures, and probably proportional to the type of infringement and the size of the niche - in PlayStation's case - or not size of "niche"- in iPad's/iPod's case - of the population impacted.

Being as popular as iDevices are is not the problem. It is the policies of Apple suppressing competition within their general purpose iOS that is the problem,